Methane Abatement in Sustainable Taxonomies

The report finds that sustainable finance taxonomies generally suffer from incomplete sectoral coverage, a tendency to prioritize usability over technical rigor, and a lack of specific, measurable criteria for methane abatement. While the energy sector has the most extensive coverage, agriculture and waste sectors are inconsistently addressed. The authors propose a set of evidence-based best practices and technical screening criteria to improve the environmental integrity of green finance frameworks.

• Sustainable finance taxonomies exhibit three core structural weaknesses: incomplete sectoral and activity coverage, a preference for usability over technical accuracy, and a lack of specificity in criteria and safeguards.
• There is significant inconsistency in how methane-relevant sectors are addressed; for example, the EU taxonomy omits agriculture entirely, and Indonesia's taxonomy lacks coverage for solid waste and wastewater.
• Taxonomy developers often over-simplify technical screening criteria (TSC) to increase user-friendliness, replacing science-based thresholds with generic requirements such as 'monitoring' or 'contingency' plans.
• Methane-related criteria are frequently qualitative or implicit, particularly in agriculture and waste, lacking quantified performance benchmarks, emission thresholds, or specified leakage rates.
• The energy sector has the most extensive coverage of methane-related activities, but fossil fuel-related activities are limited because they often fail to meet 'substantial contribution' criteria for climate mitigation.
• In the agriculture sector, livestock and rice production are either omitted or vaguely addressed; only Thailand provides relatively granular measures for rice cultivation, such as alternative wetting and drying, though it still lacks quantitative benchmarks.
• Wastewater and solid waste activities are generally included across most taxonomies except Indonesia, with anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge and landfill gas capture being the most consistently addressed activities.
• The report identifies a lack of advanced monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) tools, such as satellite or remote sensing, across the reviewed waste sector taxonomies.
• The report provides a comprehensive framework of best-practice measures, including specific lifecycle GHG emission thresholds for bioenergy and mandatory leak detection and repair (LDAR) protocols.

APA

Wetmańska, Z., Fernandes, P. D. A., Miao, G., Shankar, V., & Alanah, I. (2025). Methane Abatement in Sustainable Taxonomies. Climate Policy Initiative. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Methane-Abatement-in-Sustainable-Taxonomies.pdf

Chicago

Wetmańska, Zofia, Pedro de Aragão Fernandes, Gaoyi Miao, Varun Shankar, and Ines Alanah. Methane Abatement in Sustainable Taxonomies. Climate Policy Initiative, 2025. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Methane-Abatement-in-Sustainable-Taxonomies.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Wetmańska |first1=Zofia |last2=Fernandes |first2=Pedro de Aragão |last3=Miao |first3=Gaoyi |last4=Shankar |first4=Varun |last5=Alanah |first5=Ines |title=Methane Abatement in Sustainable Taxonomies |publisher=Climate Policy Initiative |date=December 2025 |url=https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Methane-Abatement-in-Sustainable-Taxonomies.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{wetmaska2025methane, author = {Wetmańska, Zofia and Fernandes, Pedro de Aragão and Miao, Gaoyi and Shankar, Varun and Alanah, Ines}, title = {{Methane Abatement in Sustainable Taxonomies}}, institution = {Climate Policy Initiative}, year = {2025}, month = dec, url = {https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Methane-Abatement-in-Sustainable-Taxonomies.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }